Easy Life of an Atheist

[DarkLight]

Maybe the atheists I know are narcissists as well. That could be it. And yes, I understand that narcissists can be believers as well. But is it more common for narcissists to be found among atheists simply because of their nonbelief in anything higher than themselves? Food for thought.

The flip side is the narcissistic believer very often has a warped view of God, such that somehow God always supports and agrees with the narcissist. In fact the religious view that the world will be harsh on the faithful and that we must follow God over the world, is easily twisted to support the narcissist’s idea that they are being persecuted.

That’s the answer I always hear.
And yet…it doesn’t match my real-world observation.

You’ll notice pretty much all your examples tend to be around sexuality. That’s one area where there is a large difference - but it’s only one area, after all.

With a God of perfect justice, I don’t see how your “probably” could be true. Perfect justice is giving one exactly what one asks for. The atheist asks for life without God. That is what he will be given. Don’t know, but I can’t see a just God dealing with the atheist in any other way.

I think that assumes perfect understanding. I think a mistake many believers make, is to think that deep down atheists somehow really know that God exists and decide they don’t want anything to do with him. Rather, I would say that there are many who have rejected a false understanding of God and think that is what believers are calling God (in some cases they might be right about the latter).

 

[joeybaggz]

With a God of perfect justice, I don’t see how your “probably” could be true. Perfect justice is giving one exactly what one asks for. The atheist asks for life without God. That is what he will be given. Don’t know, but I can’t see a just God dealing with the atheist in any other way.

I think that assumes perfect understanding. I think a mistake many believers make, is to think that deep down atheists somehow really know that God exists and decide they don’t want anything to do with him. Rather, I would say that there are many who have rejected a false understanding of God and think that is what believers are calling God (in some cases they might be right about the latter).
[/quote]

No perfect understanding exists this side of the realm of God. My thought speaks only to my Catholic understanding of the perfect justice of God. Simply, God will give everyone what they ask for. God will give the Christian saint what his life has asked for; he will give the atheist and the agnostic, the unbeliever what they ask for. Actually, and this is a personal belief only, God will give the righteous Buddhist, Shintoist, JW, Unitarian Universalist whatever they ask for. Personally, I think the idea of a vengeful and wrathful God is off the mark. Perfect justice is giving one what they ask for out of love for that person. Whether that person in the end is happy with their lot, is another question.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

You’ll notice pretty much all your examples tend to be around sexuality. That’s one area where there is a large difference - but it’s only one area, after all.

Fair enough.
But those are areas of deep conflict.

Nobody ever gets crap for abstaining from gossip or from shoplifting. It’s an easy kind of nice that everybody agrees on, if they don’t always follow.

But the morality that might bring censure upon ones head? It’s believers who do the heavy, unpopular lifting on that one.

Actually, I’m answering the thread title.
Which is a deceptively deep question.
Non believers do have it easier in a way, they don’t have to stand up for the hard choices that believers do.
But these choices also come with consequences. I think of non-believers in my family and friends who have few sexual restraints, and don’t feel guilt over sexual sins, but have left behind a trail of broken relationships and hurting children.
Don’t get mad, it’s just my RL observation.
And as nurse, I’ve observed that believers tend to have an easier time of it at end of life, with less anxiety and agitation.

But to answer the original post, everybody gets their heart broken in this world, believers and non believers and everyone in between.

 

[DarkLight]

My question is: what do you do with the atheist who says, for example, “I believe in truth and love, and I reject religion because it teaches people to hate and fear and mistreat people who aren’t like them and that they shouldn’t think for themselves.” Surely we as believers would say such a person doesn’t understand God - but is it really “giving them what they want” to separate them from God and as such from the truth and love they desired?

 

[joeybaggz]

“I believe in truth and love, and I reject religion because it teaches people to hate and fear and mistreat people who aren’t like them and that they shouldn’t think for themselves.”

Please: what religion is that? You certainly aren’t Catholic if that is what you believe. With all due charity, that statement of yours is absolutely (pick your own pejorative here)

 

[DarkLight]

Please: what religion is that? You certainly aren’t Catholic if that is what you believe. With all due charity, that statement of yours is absolutely (pick your own pejorative here)

I’m not saying that’s what all religion is. I am saying (1) there are certainly religious people, even Christians and yes Catholics, who speak and act that way, and (2) there are atheists who reject religion because that is in fact what they think religion does.

This is what I mean when I talked about “perfect understanding.” Perhaps perfect is too strong a term. But there are many atheists who reject religion because what they’ve seen of religion is genuinely bad. They don’t want the bad parts, and they don’t understand that you can have the good parts without the bad.

As Catholics we would of course say, the people who are bringing the bad parts in are doing it wrong, and they don’t truly understand what God is like. But there are people who practice evil because they think it’s God’s will, and who say anyone who doesn’t isn’t truly obeying God. And it’s not uncommon for atheists to see that and decide they want no part of it.

 

[joeybaggz]

But there are many atheists who reject religion because what they’ve seen of religion is genuinely bad . They don’t want the bad parts, and they don’t understand that you can have the good parts without the bad.

Okay, I understand what you are saying in that clarification. Certainly can agree that someone would choose atheist because of the evil they see in religious “people.”
That brings to mind another questions though. Are you saying the atheist (in tis case) rejects God, because of the actions of some men? The infers a belief in God, hence the term atheist is in error. Or are you saying the atheist “throws the baby out with the bathwater?”

 

[DarkLight]

That brings to mind another questions though. Are you saying the atheist (in tis case) rejects God, because of the actions of some men? The infers a belief in God, hence the term atheist is in error. Or are you saying the atheist “throws the baby out with the bathwater?”

The latter. The atheist is told “God is good”, but then sees that people do a lot of evil things and say they’re what God said to do. They see it as incoherent - how could a good God command evil? If God didn’t really command it, why are all these people doing evil and apparently sincerely thinking it’s what God wants? It makes more sense that God isn’t really, and the concept of “God” is something that humans invented and that what “God says” is really only coming from other human beings.

It makes sense in the idea that if God, by definition, must be good, but the practices that apparently come from God aren’t good, then a good God must not exist.

(Understand I am speaking from some experience here. I grew up independent fundamentalist baptist. There were people who acted like them, and wishy-washy christians who just went along with the world and didn’t actually care about God. And I have a few nasty stories about what “God” wanted them to do.)

 

[Inquisitor85]

Well in a sense it’s comforting, they’re not suffering and there’s no anxiety about whether they’re in hell or purgatory or whatever. They are just at peace. Surely as a Catholic there must be someone you’ve lost who you don’t know whether they made it to heaven or not, does that not cause you at least some anxiety?

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

Maybe when you approach death you will view differently.

Perhaps. The me 20 years ago would look at 30-something me today with confusion. Who knows who I’ll be another 20 years from now.

Last time I seriously thought I was gonna die the overriding theme of my thoughts besides how to survive was “huh? So this is how it ends.”
(about 5 years ago. Kayak flipped a few miles off shore. I couldn’t get back on it and the current was taking me out to the ocean.)

 

[Nap66]

Surely as a Catholic there must be someone you’ve lost who you don’t know whether they made it to heaven or not, does that not cause you at least some anxiety?

No. My father was a believer, but not a Catholic. On his deathbed he was baptized Catholic and during my entire life he went to Church with us as a non-Catholic. Do I worry if he made it to heaven? No. He believed in God and lived a Godly life. For me he is in heaven. If not, then that is God’s will and my anxiety will not change it. But for atheists who do not believe in God at all, whether they make it to heaven or not is irrelevant. Heaven and hell doesn’t exist for an atheist. Moot point, so yes atheists have no anxiety in that regard. But as a Christian I also do not have any anxiety if I or my loved ones make it to heaven. I have faith that believing in God and living a Godly life will get me there, and if not, then it is all as it should be according to God which is great as well.

I think SOME athesists think that they will hedge their bets and although they firmly believe God doesn’t exist, if he does, well then they will just tell God at that point that they lived a good life without him so that is good enough to make it into heaven. I don’t think it works that way.

 

[adgloriam]

I think any collective of people is higher than any one human.

Hegelian tradition has been proven wrong over and over…

 

[FiveLinden]

I think of non-believers in my family and friends who have few sexual restraints, and don’t feel guilt over sexual sins, but have left behind a trail of broken relationships and hurting children.

I know many, many unbelievers (most people who come from my city have no religion). Have known some who have behaved in the way you describe. And I have known religious people who have done so also. Non-belief does not, despite the fond wishes of many on CAF,mean that you have no more standards. In theory I see consenting sex as morally neutral, like drinking a glass of water. But I also recognise the social environment in which I live and my families expectations. So I am monogamous. My decisions are made on the basis of what is good for me and others, not on what ancient men wrote on skins.

 

[FiveLinden]

Well in a sense it’s comforting, they’re not suffering and there’s no anxiety about whether they’re in hell or purgatory or whatever. They are just at peace. Surely as a Catholic there must be someone you’ve lost who you don’t know whether they made it to heaven or not, does that not cause you at least some anxiety?

One of the saddest posts of many sad posts I have seen here was of a man who believed he had experienced a vision of his father from hell. He was most sincere in his belief when I questioned it and offered my own interpretation of his experience. An unbeliever does not experience such pain.

 

[FiveLinden]

Hegelian tradition has been proven wrong over and over…

The rightness or wrongness of my position does not matter in relation to the point I was making. I was responding to the suggestion that I thought nothing was higher than me.

 

[Catholicwife32]

They don’t have easier lives. Perhaps the issue is that you think our faith is primarily about conforming our lives to avoid sin and that the avoidance of sin makes our lives tougher. I think often if we grew up in spiritually abusive homes and spiritually abusive churches, we struggle with developing a healthy relationship with God. We relate to God as abuse victims, trying to figure out all the rules to follow to prevent God’s wrath.

The good news is that God is a loving Father. He does not abandon or abuse His children. Authentic morality is about loving God with your full heart mind soul and strength and loving your neighbor as yourself. Sin is how we fall short of that. Indeed, if we obey God’s law out of fear, we sin. And while God is not passively permissive to the point of having no boundaries, he is also merciful and just. Abuse is not just and the letter of the law will not help you apply the Christian moral principles prudently.

An appropriate fear of God is about how awesome God is. He is awfully awsome. It’s more about being amazed at our smallness and his power, feeling helpless, but then it goes beyond fear because God loves us and protects us. We are home with Him. It is beautiful.

 

[adgloriam]

the fond wishes of many on CAF

You do realize a significant number of CAF’ers despite being laity (without any formal academics in religious sciences) have done an amazing job at educating themselves and are considerably above the cut knowledgeable.

I think you misrepresent those CAf’ers most worthy of attention and the community as a whole in your statement.

As for “atheists” there is a formal methodology regarding the matter that isn’t exclusive to Catholics but actually transverse to philosophy, sociology, anthropology, even history. I would say, you don’t seem to follow that well established method and thus stand to gain yourself and improve the discussions you get involved in researching and reflecting on the exact definitions of faith and belief in the divine. You do realize that over 90% of the world population claim some belief in the divine and that makes the study quite worthy in itself.

Moreover, “atheists” “come on strong” but experience shows that on the 2nd and 3rd interview some form of belief actually emerges, the outright negation of religion seeming trendy is just an illusion of first glance. Reflecting foremost an almost total absence of prior study of the subject which does not mean the absence of inner unconfessed reflections. You will also notice the self-described “atheists” lack any formal reading on the matter, never actually having read a single book but having been exposed to thousands of hours of anti-religious bigotry off all sorts.

And, again, best reflection of such is utter poverty in the supposed “atheists” discourse reflecting only the most common places in the most uncritical manner.

 

[FiveLinden]

You will also notice the self-described “atheists” lack any formal reading on the matter, never actually having read a single book but having been exposed to thousands of hours of anti-religious bigotry off all sorts.

I have never noticed this.

 

[angel12]

You will also notice the self-described “atheists” lack any formal reading on the matter, never actually having read a single book but having been exposed to thousands of hours of anti-religious bigotry off all sorts.

Gee, I must know the only reading atheists on the planet. How did that happen?

 

[alphawoman]

I disagree that atheists feel no empathy, as many of my dearest friends are atheists. Is empathy inconsistent with the beliefs of atheism? Perhaps. But atheists are still made in the image of God, so they have the capacities He has, including the capacity for love even if they turn away from God.